The document outlines the process that the Committee on Public Administration in Quebec follows when conducting oversight mandates based on reports from the Auditor General. The process includes departments submitting action plans, public hearings, the Committee making recommendations, monitoring implementation, and reporting on progress. Since 2010, the Committee has published 5 reports reviewing implementation of over 100 recommendations, finding progress to be satisfactory in over 70% of cases. The process allows for effective parliamentary oversight and measurement of the impact of the Committee's work.

1. Getting Results through
Recommendations and Follow-up
WAAPAC Annual Conference
Lomé, September 29, 2015

2.  Canadian federalism
 Shared state soveignty between two levels of government
 One central government, ten provinces and three territories
 Division of powers
 Areas of jurisdiction shared between the central government and
the provinces
 Exclusive areas of juridiction (for instance: criminal Law) or shared
areas of jurisdiction (for instance: immigration)

3.  The National Assembly of Québec
 One of the oldest parliamentary institutions (1791)
 French and British heritage, North-American
context
 One single chamber (125 MNA’s)
The legislative power attributed to the
Legislature
Lieutenant Governor
Introduction (cont’d)

4.  The Committee on Public Administration is currently
made up of 13 MNAs.
 It is supported by a clerk and a National Assembly
research team, one of whose members is assigned to the
Committee full-time.
 Since its creation in 1998, the Committee has published
32 reports containing a total of 535 recommendations.
Introduction (cont’d)

5.  The Committee spends most of its time carrying out
accountability mandates, publicly hearing government
departments and public bodies.
 The Committee is responsible for deciding, in a private
meeting, which departments and bodies it wishes to hear
in order to
 further investigate a chapter of a report from the Auditor
General or Public Protector (Québec ombudsman)
 question a department or body on its administrative
management (annual report, strategic planning, etc.)
Introduction (cont’d)

6. Conduct of a mandate after an Auditor
General's report
1. Submission of action plan
2. Public hearing
3. Recommendations by Committee members
4. Monitoring of implementation of recommendations
5. Reporting on implementation of recommendations

7. 1. Submission of action plan
 Procedure implemented in 2006.
 Each action plan must be submitted 2 weeks before the
hearing or within 6 months after the Auditor General's
report is tabled.
 The department or body must submit its action plan to the
Committee and the Auditor General.
 The action plan must include strategic measures and a
timeline for implementing the Auditor General’s
recommendations.

8. 2. Public hearing
 Before the hearing:
 The Auditor General meets the Committee members in a
private meeting to present his or her main findings and
propose ideas. The Auditor General also provides an
assessment of the measures and timeline proposed in the
action plan.
 During the hearing:
 Committee members question the senior management of
the department or body present.
 Discussions generally concern administrative management
and any action required to correct the problems noted.

9. 3. Recommendations by Committee
members
 Members meet in a private meeting to discuss what
observations and recommendations to make.
 The Auditor General does not attend this meeting.
 The Committee may reiterate the Auditor General's
recommendations or give its own.
 Recommendations are usually addressed to the
department or body, the Government and sometimes the
Auditor General.

10. 3. Recommendations by Committee
members (cont'd)
 The Committee’s research officer drafts the report.
 The Committee tables two reports per year in the National
Assembly (June and December).
 The report includes Committee members' observations,
conclusions and recommendations for the hearings held
during the sessional period.
 A copy of the report is sent to each entity heard. The latter
are invited to submit comments and carry out the
appropriate follow-up.

11. 4. Monitoring of implementation of
recommendations
 The Committee clerk compiles the follow-up deadlines in a
table to keep track of whether they have been met and to
give reminders if necessary.
 All follow-up documents must be sent to Committee
members and the Auditor General.
 The Commission can hear a department or body again if
the follow-up documents submitted or corrective measures
carried out are not satisfactory.

12. 5. Reporting on implementation of
recommendations
 Prepared in collaboration with the Auditor General, who
assesses the progress made in implementing a certain
number of Committee recommendations.
 The Auditor General's conclusions are sent to the Committee.
 The Committee devotes one chapter of one of its bi-annual
reports to the implementation of recommendations.
 Initiated in 2010. To date, 5 reports, presenting a review of
the implementation of a total of 104 recommendations, have
been published. Progress has been considered, at the time of
each assessment, to be satisfactory in 73 cases in all.

13. Conclusions
 Good cooperation on the part of the departments and bodies in
submitting action plans and follow-up documents.
 The action plans and follow-up documents allow the Committee
to complete the cycle of parliamentary oversight.
 Reporting on the implementation of recommendations makes it
possible to measure the effectiveness of the Committee's
recommendations and carry out any required follow-up.
 The Committee is pursuing its efforts to improve its practices.